Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 21 of 21

Thread: U.S. Said to Have Abandoned Plans to Keep Troops in Iraq Next Year

  1. #16
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,728
    Penneta wants immunity for the Troops against Iraqi Law. Cover your ass, everyone has long figured out that the Government is corrupt. Protect our own or you do it yourself.

    Personally, I would rather see our Troops safe from such bullshit. Bring them home if an agreement cannot be met. One that benefits both in cost and legalities.

    And "IF" kept in the country, at whose cost is it? Time to play hard ball!

    The war has cost enough, who is paying this tab?
    Last edited by Dreadnought; 17 Oct 11, at 01:37.
    Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

  2. #17
    Contributor RoccoR's Avatar
    Join Date
    19 Oct 10
    Location
    Reynoldsburg, OH USA
    Posts
    307
    et al,

    However, with the Iraqis, such a thing is "never" a sure thing. As much as it makes sense from a USG perspective, the fact of the matter is, their are powers within Iraq that really don't want us there.

    Radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr has called for public rallies on Jan. 1 to celebrate the U.S. withdrawal, but the idea hasnít gained much traction with other Iraqi political leaders. For now, there are no formal ceremonies planned in Iraq to mark the end of the U.S.-led mission there or to commemorate the thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed in the conflict.
    One Source: http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/iraq-war-ends-with-a-whimper-not-a-bang-20111017

    I suspect that the USG will keep about 200 (or so) active military (not counting the Marine Security Guard) in official status within the DOS (Embassy) contingent.

    Without regard to the "spin" that political truth-sayers and administration officials will place on this, the objective judgement should be based on the National Strategy for Victory in Iraq; look at the prediction and definitions against the actual outcomes.

    Victory in Iraq is Defined in Stages
    • Short term, Iraq is making steady progress in fighting terrorists, meeting political milestones, building democratic institutions, and standing up security forces.
    • Medium term, Iraq is in the lead defeating terrorists and providing its own security, with a fully constitutional government in place, and on its way to achieving its economic potential.
    • Longer term, Iraq is peaceful, united, stable, and secure, well

    Well after, the Dead, the Wounded and the Treasure spent, to further this cause into Iraq (those lovable and very worthy people), where are we in terms of "victory;" as defined by Washington.

    Most Respectfully,
    R

  3. #18
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,728
    Radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr

    IMO, They "should" punch that jerkoffs ticket too before leaving. This is why I in the most part am glad they will bring them home. An Iranian bred and tought lap dog like that having any kind of say in that government can only spell trouble with his brand of "religion" fueling it. He is as bad as the Basij in Iran. In other words the religious torture and terror police of the people in his own little mind.

    Bring them home and demand compensation for the time, lives and money already spent.

    Atleast those Troops can hold their heads high while leaving. They did more for those people then anyone has and more then helped rebuild, educate and better their infastructure.
    Last edited by Dreadnought; 17 Oct 11, at 23:16.
    Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.

  4. #19
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jun 07
    Posts
    1,482
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnought View Post
    Penneta wants immunity for the Troops against Iraqi Law. Cover your ass, everyone has long figured out that the Government is corrupt. Protect our own or you do it yourself.

    Personally, I would rather see our Troops safe from such bullshit. Bring them home if an agreement cannot be met. One that benefits both in cost and legalities.

    And "IF" kept in the country, at whose cost is it? Time to play hard ball!

    The war has cost enough, who is paying this tab?
    Im with you Dread. Bring home our boyz and gals.

  5. #20
    Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Dec 06
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    347
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnought View Post
    Radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr

    IMO, They "should" punch that jerkoffs ticket too before leaving. This is why I in the most part am glad they will bring them home. An Iranian bred and tought lap dog like that having any kind of say in that government can only spell trouble with his brand of "religion" fueling it. He is as bad as the Basij in Iran. In other words the religious torture and terror police of the people in his own little mind.

    Bring them home and demand compensation for the time, lives and money already spent.

    Atleast those Troops can hold their heads high while leaving. They did more for those people then anyone has and more then helped rebuild, educate and better their infastructure.

    1. The Iranians support Maliki more than Sadr. They brokered the 2008 deal between Maliki and Moqtada, and at that time warned Sadr to back off. From the Iranian point of view, Moqtada is just a "Plan B" option.

    2. Having the Sadrists in parliament is part of a democracy in Iraq. That faction represents a fair-sized chunk of public opinion. Moqtada's decision to pursue parliamentary politics is preferable to continued civil war, and it speaks to his own growing maturity as a political leader.

    3. Sadr's presence in parliament is actually a bit of fig leaf for the invaders' claims to support democracy. Probably not what Mssrs. Bush, Cheney and Blair had in mind, but c'est la guerre.

  6. #21
    Contributor RoccoR's Avatar
    Join Date
    19 Oct 10
    Location
    Reynoldsburg, OH USA
    Posts
    307
    cape_royds, et al,

    I agree with most of this; the exception being, about the al-Sadr puppet. But, that is minor.

    Quote Originally Posted by cape_royds View Post
    1. The Iranians support Maliki more than Sadr. They brokered the 2008 deal between Maliki and Moqtada, and at that time warned Sadr to back off. From the Iranian point of view, Moqtada is just a "Plan B" option.

    2. Having the Sadrists in parliament is part of a democracy in Iraq. That faction represents a fair-sized chunk of public opinion. Moqtada's decision to pursue parliamentary politics is preferable to continued civil war, and it speaks to his own growing maturity as a political leader.

    3. Sadr's presence in parliament is actually a bit of fig leaf for the invaders' claims to support democracy. Probably not what Mssrs. Bush, Cheney and Blair had in mind, but c'est la guerre.
    (COMMENT)

    This goes back to the USG (particularly DOD and DOS) being able to analysis a problem, perform a cost & risk assessment, develop a plan, and execute it under conditions that give a reasonable expectation for success.

    I believe that our senior leadership and National Security Decision Making Process are (both) seriously flawed. Both aspects allowed the flawed intervention to proceed with out the necessary R&D - and planning to be supported. I cannot hard believe that the the US Military Leadership went into Iraq without a viable Post-Conflict Plan.

    The fact that Iraq is now a non-secular state (backward motion), and so very anti-american (so opposite our expectation), and more aligned with Iran (backward motion), demonstrates how totally inept the planning and execution capabilities with the departments of Defense and State really are.

    Most Respectfully,
    R
    Last edited by RoccoR; 21 Oct 11, at 20:42. Reason: Spelling

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Iraq Plans To Buy 2,000 T-72s
    By Ironduke in forum Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation New Dawn
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 04 May 09,, 22:38
  2. Obama says most US troops in Iraq home within a year
    By xrough in forum Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation New Dawn
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04 Feb 09,, 13:11
  3. 13-year-old suicide bomber kills troops
    By Southie in forum Operation Enduring Freedom and Af-Pak
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 15 Dec 08,, 18:40
  4. Ahmadinejad plans visit to Iraq
    By Ironduke in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 19 Feb 08,, 18:56
  5. New Year Eve Plans?
    By THL in forum World Affairs Board Pub
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 09 Jan 07,, 03:44

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •